Mounted Warfare TestBed

Last updated

Mounted Warfare TestBed (MWTB) at Fort Knox, Kentucky, was the premier site for distributed simulation experiments in the US Army for over 20 years. It used simulation systems, including fully manned virtual simulators and computer-generated forces, to perform experiments that examined current and future weapon systems, concepts, and tactics.

Contents

"In name only, Cyberspace had its origins in science fiction: its historical beginnings and technological innovations are clearly military (from NASA's primitive flight simulators of the 1940s to the ultra-modern SIMNET-D facilities in Fort Knox, Kentucky)..." - James der Derian, Antidiplomacy

History

1996 Staff of the Mounted Warfare TestBed MWTB Staff.JPG
1996 Staff of the Mounted Warfare TestBed

The MWTB started as the initial site of the SIMNET-D [1] program in 1986. SIMNET-D was a spinoff of the SIMNET [2] [3] program, which was the first successful program to use low-cost computers to construct virtual simulators whose resources were distributed rather than centralized. These M1 Abrams and M2 Bradley simulators, along with the Semi-Automated Forces simulation and the Management Command and Control (MCC) system, allowed the creation of a realistic battlefield where participants could actively fight an enemy using current systems in real time.

~2006 Staff of the Mounted Warfare TestBed MWTB Staff1.JPG
~2006 Staff of the Mounted Warfare TestBed

The first MWTB site manager, Dick Garvey, established a strong focus on measurement of battlefield effects from Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) simulation. This was in marked contrast with the then-prevalent approach of using highly scripted, closed-form simulations, where the outcome was defined by the scenario designer. HITL provided an opportunity to evaluate new systems and concepts whose application was not yet fully understood.

With an enthusiastic embrace of technical innovation and a lean management style, the site carried Garvey's initial philosophy to establish many of the concepts and techniques for experimentation using distributed simulation.

Visit by Gen Petraeus Petraeus.JPG
Visit by Gen Petraeus

Significant Exercises

1988: Forward Area Air Defense (FAADS)

The first use of SIMNET for Developmental Tests occurred in March and April 1988 at Ft. Knox and Ft. Rucker. These tests were feasibility studies to determine whether SIMNET could be used for Force Development Test and Evaluation (FDT&E) and Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E). A total of 164 soldiers and pilots from Ft. Bliss, Ft. Knox, Ft. Rucker, and the Army and Air National Guard participated.

1989-1994: CVCC

The most important early user of the MWTB was the Combat Vehicle Command and Control (CVCC) series of experiments by Army Research Institute that examined various aspects of the proposed upgrades to the M1A1 tank, including computerized navigation and digital command-and-control. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] They were instrumental in developing the training plans for the M1A2. The experiments used a company of SIMNET M1 simulators, augmented by a battalion of BLUFOR from the Semi-Automated Forces system.

1990-1992: Line-of-Sight Anti-Tank (LOSAT)

The LOSAT system, which used a hypervelocity kinetic-energy missile and a sophisticated fire control system, was evaluated for human-interface and system performance.

1995: Anti- Armor Advanced Technology Demonstration (A2ATD)

The A2ATD [10] program used a series of six experiments, along with extensive improvements to simulation technology, to demonstrate the utility of man-in-the-loop distributed simulation to perform credible experiments to support acquisition decisions. By demonstrating a verified, validated and accredited DIS capability, A2ATD established the foundation for subsequent activities at the MWTB and at all of the other Battle Labs.

1995: Focused Dispatch

The Focused Dispatch Experiment [11] was one of the first instances of live-virtual-constructive (LVC) simulation. Conducted at Fort Knox and the Western Kentucky Training Area via satellite linkage, its primary purpose was to examine how digital connections might enhance an armored formation's fire support, intelligence, logistics, and battle command, to determine whether enhancements in lethality, survivability, and tempo would result. Real vehicles from Company B of Task Force 2-33 were fitted with Vehicular Data Communications and Positional Awareness Demonstration devices, which transmitted the vehicles' location every 10 seconds into the simulated environment back at Knox. In the simulators at the MWTB, the soldiers from the remaining two companies saw the real vehicles exactly as they would see simulated vehicles.

1997-2000: Battle Command Reengineering

Battle Command Reengineering was a series of experiments that looked at how digital command-and-control systems should be incorporated into brigade-and-below units. It also focused on what attributes these systems should have, their impact on other systems in the Army, and on the use of related future systems, like remote sensors and precision fires. It helped pave the way for the Future Combat Systems program. It fostered numerous innovations, like the development of automated mechanisms for evaluating the performance of the command staff, [12] examination of how situational awareness uncertainty affects decision making, information request, and staff dynamics, [13] development of training programs for digital forces along with redesigned command staff processes for optimally efficient use of digital C2 systems, [14] and aggressive employments of image generation and HLA networking. [15]

2000: BCIS

The Battlefield Combat Identification System (BCIS) was evaluated in a series of experiments that looked at user-interface and battlefield performance. The system was effective in reducing fratricide in night battles. However, in day battles, more fratricides occurred than did at night. This phenomenon was believed to be the result of troops using BCIS at night when visibility is poor, but trusted their own vision in the day more than they trust BCIS responses. [16]

2002-2003: C4ISR

The C4ISR experiment provided input to the FCS Analysis of Alternatives and the Operational and Objective (O&O) analysis to support the FCS Milestone B decision. The experiment was conducted in a human-in-the-loop, simulation supported, secure environment. The experiment focused on the issues of battle command and how it affected measures of force effectiveness.

2004-2007: Omni-Fusion

The Omni-Fusion experiments built on the concepts of Battle Command Re-Engineering and C4ISR to refine designs and concepts for the Future Combat Systems Program. The application of widely distributed simulation to classified experimentation was highly developed during these exercises.

2006: Urban Resolve 2015

The Urban Resolve 2015 was designed to examine Joint Urban Operations (JUO), Military Support for Stabilization, Security, Transition and Reconstruction Operations (SSTRO), and Major Combat Operations (MCO). [17]

2006: RDECOM Experiment FY06 (RUX06)

The RUX06 was a true LVC event, combining manned simulators, a force wraparound generated in constructive simulation with actual vehicles fitted with emulators of future C2 technologies on the ranges at Ft. Knox in real-time; this experiment examined workload and stress of crews of future manned vehicles under varied threat conditions. [18] [19]

2008: COIN

The Counter Insurgency Experiment [20] was a large, multi-site exercise that included most members of the BLCSE. It simulated downtown Baghdad, Iraq, with US and Iraqi soldiers, Iraqi police, armed and unarmed civilians from several groups, like Shia and Sunni, and armed insurgents. It examined how Future Combat Systems technologies work in a dense, urban environment.

2009: Complex Web Defense

The Complex Web Defense Experiment examined the effectiveness of systems and tactics of a force composed of a Combined Arms Bn (CAB), one Stryker Infantry Battalion, Force Design Update (FDU) Reconnaissance Squadron, supported by appropriate joint and army enablers against a predominantly dismounted enemy that was embedded in a semi-urban environment. [21] It was one of the first large distributed exercises using OneSAF with classified performance data.

Innovations in Simulation Technology

ACRT

Desktop ACRT MWTB ACRT.JPG
Desktop ACRT

The Advanced Reconfigurable Research Tool was a virtual simulator developed using OneSAF TestBed as a software base. It was very modular to allow rapid changes to vehicle characteristics, and it could model many vehicle types, like the M1 Abrams, M2 Bradley, Stryker, HMMWV, along with various variants from the Future Combat Systems program. It incorporated an innovative mobility model for the OneSAF TestBed (OTB) simulation that used SIMNET and CCTT soil codes in the digital terrain database to provide fine-grained soils with appropriate mobility response for computer-generated entities. [22]

SA Server

The Situational Awareness (SA) Server was an interface between the simulation and tactical networks. It provided Level 1 Sensor Fusion using a Kalman filter. The tactical network it supported used experimental DIS PDUs for the blue and red Common Operating Picture (COP). It also supported an early version of the NetFires system for semi-automated fire support. Multiple SA Servers could be configured in a multi-cell arrangement to use communications effects as defined by a comms model like ALCES or QualNet.

Tech Control

Tech Control MWTB TectControl.JPG
Tech Control

The Tech Control was a collection of tools that monitored a widely distributed simulation to ensure that configuration management and network performance standards were met. The tools, like the Reporter, the Exercise Manager, and the NetRouter, allowed Tech Control personnel to manage large exercises like COIN with high simulation availability.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data Collection and Analysis was primarily based on the collection and correlation of network simulation traffic (DIS PDUs). The data were written to flat files or directly to a Relational Database where they were further processed and analyzed to produce charts, graphs, tables, spreadsheets and presentations for the use of Army Operations Research / Systems Analysts (ORSAs).

Virtusphere

VirtuSphere simulator Virtusphere.jpg
VirtuSphere simulator

The VirtuSphere was a single-soldier manned simulator that incorporates a large sphere that allows a human to walk around the simulated battlefield (like a hamster in a ball). It was based on the ACRT technology, and was used at the MWTB for experiments that examine future weapon systems and tactics and for evaluating soldier behavior.

The simulator was frequently seen at trade shows and science festivals, like the USA Science Festival, the San Diego Science Festival and the Jackson IT Day. It was typically one of the most popular exhibits.

Names

Contractors

The MWTB was always a government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) facility. The contractors were:

Key Personnel

Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR)

Site Manager

Staff Photos

Logos

2005 MWTB Logo 2005.jpg
2005
2006 MWTB Logo 2006.jpg
2006
2007 MWTB Logo 2007.jpg
2007
2009 MWTB Logo 2009.jpg
2009

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Simulation</span> Imitation of the operation of a real-world process or system over time

A simulation is an imitative representation of a process or system that could exist in the real world. In this broad sense, simulation can often be used interchangeably with model. Sometimes a clear distinction between the two terms is made, in which simulations require the use of models; the model represents the key characteristics or behaviors of the selected system or process, whereas the simulation represents the evolution of the model over time. Another way to distinguish between the terms is to define simulation as experimentation with the help of a model. This definition includes time-independent simulations. Often, computers are used to execute the simulation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flight simulator</span> Technology used for training aircrew

A flight simulator is a device that artificially re-creates aircraft flight and the environment in which it flies, for pilot training, design, or other purposes. It includes replicating the equations that govern how aircraft fly, how they react to applications of flight controls, the effects of other aircraft systems, and how the aircraft reacts to external factors such as air density, turbulence, wind shear, cloud, precipitation, etc. Flight simulation is used for a variety of reasons, including flight training, the design and development of the aircraft itself, and research into aircraft characteristics and control handling qualities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Future Combat Systems</span> Modernization program of United States Army

Future Combat Systems (FCS) was the United States Army's principal modernization program from 2003 to early 2009. Formally launched in 2003, FCS was envisioned to create new brigades equipped with new manned and unmanned vehicles linked by an unprecedented fast and flexible battlefield network. The U.S. Army claimed it was their "most ambitious and far-reaching modernization" program since World War II. Between 1995 and 2009, $32 billion was expended on programs such as this, "with little to show for it".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of unmanned combat aerial vehicles</span>

The history of unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) is closely tied to the general history of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). While the technology dates back at least as far as the 1940s, common usage in live operations came in the 2000s. UCAVs have now become an important part of modern warfare, including in the Syrian civil war, the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war and during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

SIMNET was a wide area network with vehicle simulators and displays for real-time distributed combat simulation: tanks, helicopters and airplanes in a virtual battlefield. SIMNET was developed for and used by the United States military. SIMNET development began in the mid-1980s, was fielded starting in 1987, and was used for training until successor programs came online well into the 1990s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Army Research Laboratory</span> Research facility of the United States Army

The U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Army Research Laboratory is the U.S. Army's foundational research laboratory. ARL is headquartered at the Adelphi Laboratory Center (ALC) in Adelphi, Maryland. Its largest single site is at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Other major ARL locations include Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, Graces Quarters, Maryland, and NASA's Glenn Research Center, Ohio and Langley Research Center, Virginia. ARL also has regional sites in Playa Vista, California, Chicago, Austin, TX, and Boston.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">VirtuSphere</span> Spherical virtual reality device

VirtuSphere is a spherical virtual reality device. It consists of a 10-foot hollow sphere, which is placed on a special platform that allows the sphere to rotate freely in any direction according to the user’s steps. It works with computer based simulations and virtual worlds, and rotates as the user walks, allowing for an unlimited plane upon which the user can walk. A wireless head-mounted display with gyroscopes is used to both track the user's head movement as well as display the environment of the virtual world. VirtuSphere can serve many purposes, including exercise, video gaming, military training, and virtual museum tours.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane Division</span> Division of the U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center

Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane Division is the principal tenant command located at Naval Support Activity Crane in Indiana.

Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation, or HWIL, is a technique that is used in the development and testing of complex real-time embedded systems. HIL simulation provides an effective testing platform by adding the complexity of the process-actuator system, known as a plant, to the test platform. The complexity of the plant under control is included in testing and development by adding a mathematical representation of all related dynamic systems. These mathematical representations are referred to as the "plant simulation". The embedded system to be tested interacts with this plant simulation.

A program executive officer, or PEO, is one of a few key individuals in the United States military acquisition process. As can be seen from the examples below, a program executive officer may be responsible for a specific program, or for an entire portfolio of similar programs.

The Aggregate Level Simulation Protocol (ALSP) is a protocol and supporting software that enables simulations to interoperate with one another. Replaced by the High Level Architecture (simulation) (HLA), it was used by the US military to link analytic and training simulations.

List of abbreviations, acronyms and initials related to military subjects such as modern armour, artillery, infantry, and weapons, along with their definitions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Operational Test and Evaluation Force</span> U.S. Navy organization for operational testing and evaluation

The Operational Test and Evaluation Force (OPTEVFOR) is an independent and objective agency within the United States Navy for the operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) of naval aviation, surface warfare, submarine warfare, C4I, cryptologic, and space systems in support Navy and Department of Defense acquisition programs.

Live, Virtual, & Constructive (LVC) Simulation is a broadly used taxonomy for classifying Modeling and Simulation (M&S). However, categorizing a simulation as a live, virtual, or constructive environment is problematic since there is no clear division among these categories. The degree of human participation in a simulation is infinitely variable, as is the degree of equipment realism. The categorization of simulations also lacks a category for simulated people working real equipment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Army Simulation and Training Technology Center</span> Military unit

The United States Army Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC) provides the United States Department of Defense and United States Department of Homeland Security, with applied research to develop simulation technologies, build on current simulation knowledge, and understand system of systems environments where human, agent, and teams are involved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battlefield management system</span> Military software type

A battlefield management system (BMS) is a system meant to integrate information acquisition and processing to enhance command and control of a military unit through multiple other C4ISR(Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) solutions to give commanding officers, NCOs or individual vehicles better situational awareness to friendly units around them and prevent "blue on blue" incidents, provide better situational awareness to OPFOR units seen by friendly units, speed relaying of orders and thus accelerate combat operations and maneuvers, facilitating fire support orders as an enemy can be marked by a squad leader on his terminals map and then have the location relayed directly to artillery, CAS or other firesupport

JEFX, or Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment, was the periodic US Air Force-led operational experiment created to evaluate new technologies and war fighting concepts in a simulated wartime battle environment. It was an outgrowth of the C4I Initiative mandated by the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986. It was monitored by the Air Force senior leadership and each event culminated with a report for the Chief of Staff of the Air Force.

A battle lab or battle laboratory is an organization dedicated to studying changes in the military.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Army Futures Command</span> U.S. Army Command that runs modernization projects

The United States Army Futures Command (AFC) is a United States Army command that runs modernization projects. It is headquartered in Austin, Texas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human Engineering Laboratory</span>

The Human Engineering Laboratory (HEL) was a research institution under the U.S. Army Materiel Command that specialized in human performance research, human factors engineering, robotics, and human-in-the-loop technology. Located at Aberdeen Proving Ground, HEL acted as the Army’s lead laboratory for human factors and ergonomics research from 1951 to 1992, during which researchers investigated methods to maximize combat effectiveness, improve weapons and equipment designs, and reduce operation costs and errors. HEL was one of the seven Army laboratories that merged together to form the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) in 1992.

References

  1. Garvey, Richard E. Jr., "SIMNET-D: Extending Simulation Boundaries". Journal of the American Defense Preparedness Association, 1989
  2. Garvey, Richard E., Jr., and Monday, Paul, "SIMNET (SIMulator NETworking)", BBN Systems and Technologies, Bellevue, WA, July 28, 1988.
  3. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Distributed Interactive Simulation of Combat, OTA-BP-ISS-151 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995)
  4. Frances M. Ainslie; Bruce C. Leibrecht; Nancy K. Atwood, "Combat Vehicle Command and Control Systems: 3. Simulation-Based Company Evaluation of the Soldier-Machine Interface (SMI)", 1990
  5. Nancy K. Atwood; Kathleen A. Quinkert; Mary R. Campbell; Karen F. Lameier; Bruce C. Leibrecht, "Combat Vehicle Command and Control Systems: Training Implications Based on Company-Level Simulations", 1990
  6. Bruce C. Leibrecht; James W. Kerins; Frances M. Ainslie; Alicia R. Sawyer; Jerry M. Childs, "Combat Vehicle Command and Control Systems. 1. Simulation-Based Company- Level Evaluation", 1992
  7. Lawrence H. O'Brien; Donald Wigginton; John C. Morey; Bruce C. Leibrecht; Frances M. Ainslie, "Combat Vehicle Command and Control Battalion-Level Preliminary Evaluation", 1992
  8. Bruce C. Leibrecht; Glen A. Meade; Jeffrey H. Schmidt; William J. Doherty; Carl W. Lickteig, "Evaluation of the Combat Vehicle Command and Control System. Operational Effectiveness of an Armor Battalion", 1993
  9. Glen A. Meade; Ryszard Lozicki; Bruce C. Leibrecht; Paul G. Smith; William E. Myers, "The Combat Vehicle Command and Control System. Combat Performance of Armor Battalions Using Interactive Simulation", 1994
  10. Harkrider, Susan and Yeakel, William, "Anti Armor Advanced Technology Demonstration (A2ATD) Experiment 1", 1995 "National Training and Simulation Association - Article". Archived from the original on 2013-01-28. Retrieved 2010-07-12.
  11. Lucas, Thomas; Bankes, Steven; and Vye, Patrick, "Improving the Analytic Contribution of Advanced Warfighting Experiments", 1998
  12. Throne, May; Holden, William; Lickteig, Carl, "Automated Measures of Staff Performance for Battle Command Reengineering III", 2000,
  13. Golden, Michael; Cook, Thomas; Grynovicki, Jock; Kysor, Kragg; Leedom, Dennis, "ARL Insights From the Battle Command Re-engineering III Concept Experimentation Program", 2000,
  14. Deatz, Richard; Greene, Katrina; Holden, William; Throne, May; Lickteig, Carl, "Refinement of Prototype Staff Training Methods for Future Forces", 2000 "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-23. Retrieved 2010-07-02.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  15. Lorenzo, Max; Riggs, Bill; Schell, Dave; Caruso, Mike; Burns, Major Joseph, "Integration of Engineering Level Sensor Federation into a Brigade Level C4ISR Experiment Using RTI V1.7", 2000
  16. Battlefield Combat Identification System
  17. Ceranowicz, Andy; Torpey, Mark, "Adopting to Urban Warfare" 2000 Archived 2011-09-30 at the Wayback Machine
  18. McDowell, Kaleb; Nunez, Patrick; Novak, Brian, "RUX Experimental Review for Technology Transfer", 2006
  19. Sterling, Bruce; Perala, Chuck; Blaske, Stephen, "Workload and Stress of Crews Operating Future Manned Vehicles", 2007
  20. Monday, Paul, "Architecture of the Counter Insurgency Experiment" The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, Vol. 6, No. 2, 69-77, 2009
  21. Paul Monday; Engin Z. Altan, "OneSAF Testing in Complex Web Defense (CWD) Experiment", 2008 [ntsa.metapress.com/index/q69v2w384p435l52.pdf]
  22. Levent Yilmaz, Tuncer I. Ören, "Prospective Issues in Simulation Model Composability: Basic Concepts to Advance Theory, Methodology, and Technology", Modeling and Simulation Journal Online, 2006 [ permanent dead link ]

Videos

Articles